1887

Abstract

Summary

We present an improved local wavenumber method, based on the fractional-order differentiation of potential fields. Such kind of differentiation allows a fractional-order local wavenumber to be defined, whose usefulness is two-fold: a) the positions of the peaks of the two different-order local wavenumber are essentially the same and also holds in their difference; b) the noise-enhancement may be kept to a minimum, if compared to standard local wavenumber, based on integer-order field differentiation. The fractional-order local wavenumber is applied to synthetic and real examples and it provided a good estimation of both depth to sources and structural index.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201412758
2015-06-01
2020-06-03
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abbas, M.A., Fedi, M. and Florio, G.
    [2014] Improving the local wavenumber method by automatic DEXP transformation. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 111, 250–255.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cooper, G.R.J. and Cowan, D.R.
    [2003] The application of fractional calculus to potential field data. Exploration Geophysics, 34(4), 51–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Gunn, P.J.
    [1975] Linear Transformations of Gravity and Magnetic Fields. Geophysical Prospecting, 23, 300–312.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Gunn, P.J., Fitzgerald, D., Yassi, N. and Dart, P.
    [1997] New Algorithms for Visually Enhancing Airborne Geophysical Data. Exploration Geophysics, 28, 220–224.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Keating, P.
    [2009] Improved use of the local wavenumber in potential-field interpretation. Geophysics, 74(6), L75–L85.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Nabighian, M.N.
    [1972] The analytic signal of two-dimensional magnetic bodies with polygonal cross-section. its properties and use for automated anomaly interpretation. Geophysics, 37(3), 507–517.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Phillips, J.D., Hansen, R.O. and Blakely, R.J.
    [2007] The use of curvature in potential-field interpretation. Exploration Geophysics, 38(2), 111–119.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Salem, A., Ravat, D., Smith, R., and Ushijima, K.
    [2005] Interpretation of magnetic data using an enhanced local wavenumber (ELW) method. Geophysics, 70 (2), L7–L12.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Smith, R.S., Thurston, J.B., Dai, T.F. and MacLeod, I.N.
    [1998] ISPI™—the improved source parameter imaging method. Geophysical Prospecting, 46(2), 141–151.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Thompson, D.T.
    [1982] EULDPH: A new technique for making computer-assisted depth estimates from magnetic data. Geophysics, 47, 31–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Thurston, J.B. and Smith, R.S.
    [1997] Automatic conversion of magnetic data to depth, dip, and susceptibility contrast using the SPI (TM) method. Geophysics, 62(3), 807–813.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201412758
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201412758
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error